Some papers refer to Omega_0 without defining it. (Example: The first footnote on page 2 in http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/9908/9908159v3.pdf.) What's the normal assumption in this case? Omega_0 = Omega_m (Omega_m as in Omega_m + Omega_Lambda = 1 in LambdaCDM) fits the context, but seems strange in the above paper because the authors use the notation Omega_m elsewhere in the paper. Is Omega_0 = Omega_m?(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

A related question: That paper refers to the "universal density" rho_u. I haven't heard that term before. rho_u = Omega_m * rho_critical fits the context. Is "universal density" = Omega_m * rho_critical?

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Terminology: Omega_0 = Omega_m? and more

Loading...

Similar Threads - Terminology Omega_0 Omega_m | Date |
---|---|

B Are universe and big bang considered to be the same thing? | Jul 11, 2016 |

Terminology in structure generating | May 8, 2014 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**